【摘要】：我國(guó)一直在進(jìn)行高等教育改革,但是其改革的方向一直集中在外部改革,對(duì)于內(nèi)部而言,其改革的規(guī)模和方式都是滯后的,這在很大程度上制約了我國(guó)自主辦學(xué)的能力和水平。因此,在新世紀(jì)我國(guó)改革的方向必然是對(duì)于高校其內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)的調(diào)整,而且有必要把調(diào)整大學(xué)內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)放到更加重要的位置。但內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)的治理是一個(gè)非常宏大的課題。歐美高校教授治校的思路為我國(guó)大學(xué)改革提供了借鑒。 教授治校的歷史非常悠久,萌芽于中世紀(jì)的巴黎大學(xué),是西方高校典型的管理模式,在西方大學(xué)的管理中發(fā)揮了重要的作用。19世紀(jì)德國(guó)現(xiàn)代大學(xué)構(gòu)建起來(lái)的新型的“正教授治�！钡慕M織模式,把教授管理大學(xué)事務(wù)的權(quán)力推向了極致。之后,美國(guó)大學(xué)增添的參與式管理也為教授治校提供了新鮮的血液。二十世紀(jì)以來(lái),教授治校的管理模式隨著高等教育辦學(xué)環(huán)境的變化發(fā)生了相應(yīng)的改變,這種趨勢(shì)主要是教師群體作為管理者和其他相關(guān)的利益群體一致參與大學(xué)的管理。作為歐洲高校主要的管理方式,教授治校是促使西方大學(xué)走向興盛的重要原因。 歐美大學(xué)因歷史淵源、政治體制、經(jīng)濟(jì)水平等因素的不同,不同國(guó)家的教授治校在組織機(jī)制上呈現(xiàn)出比較明顯的形態(tài)差異。按照大學(xué)里權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)的占有方式的不同,可以將教授治校分為三種治理模式：歐洲大陸模式、英國(guó)模式、美國(guó)模式。其中歐洲國(guó)家的英國(guó)、德國(guó)和法國(guó)的治校最為典型。盡管,不同國(guó)度存在差異,但是其背后仍然體現(xiàn)出相同的特征,這些特征就是教授治校的核心所在。 二十世紀(jì)上半葉,教授治校作為一種大學(xué)理念引進(jìn)到我國(guó),對(duì)促進(jìn)我國(guó)大學(xué)的發(fā)展產(chǎn)生了重要的影響。但在新中國(guó)成立后,這一制度被長(zhǎng)時(shí)間地中斷了。近些年來(lái),隨著我國(guó)高校教育體制的改革和深化發(fā)展,教授治校開(kāi)始受到越來(lái)越多的關(guān)注,很多大學(xué)也開(kāi)始進(jìn)行新的教授治校的嘗試,努力構(gòu)建符合我國(guó)高校情況的治理模式和結(jié)構(gòu)。但到目前為止,中國(guó)大學(xué)的內(nèi)部治理仍然存在嚴(yán)重的問(wèn)題和危機(jī)。主要變現(xiàn)為對(duì)教授治校思想認(rèn)識(shí)存在誤區(qū)；高校管理體制當(dāng)中的科層文化傾向；教授治校法律制度的缺失。這些問(wèn)題嚴(yán)重制約了我國(guó)高校水平的進(jìn)一步提升。有鑒于此,我國(guó)大學(xué)的內(nèi)部改革主要方向應(yīng)該是向歐美大學(xué)借鑒教授治校的成功的經(jīng)驗(yàn),以便恢復(fù)教授和學(xué)術(shù)力量在學(xué)校管理中的地位和權(quán)威。
[Abstract]:China has been carrying out the reform of higher education, but the direction of its reform has been concentrated on the external reform, for the internal, the scale and the way of the reform are lagging behind, which to a large extent restricts the ability and level of our country to run a school independently. Therefore, in the new century, the direction of reform in our country must be to adjust the internal structure of colleges and universities, and it is necessary to put the adjustment of the internal structure of universities in a more important position. But the governance of internal structure is a very big topic. The idea of managing universities by professors in Europe and the United States provides a reference for the reform of universities in our country. The history of professor administration is very long. It originated from the University of Paris in the Middle Ages. It is a typical management model in western universities. It has played an important role in the management of western universities. The modern German universities in the 19th century constructed a new organizational model of "managing universities by full professors", which pushed the power of professors to manage university affairs to the extreme. Since then, the addition of participatory management in American universities has provided fresh blood for professorship. Since the 20th century, the management mode of teaching management has changed with the change of higher education environment. This trend is that the teachers as managers and other relevant interest groups participate in the management of universities. As the main management mode of European universities, professors are the important reasons to promote the prosperity of western universities. Because of the differences of historical origin, political system, economic level and so on, the organizational mechanism of professors in different countries is quite different. According to the different ways of possession of power structure in universities, we can divide the governance of professors into three modes: continental European model, British model and American model. Among them, the European countries of the United Kingdom, Germany and France the most typical school governance. Although there are differences in different countries, there are still the same characteristics behind them, which are the core of teaching. In the first half of the 20th century, professor administration was introduced into China as a kind of university idea, which had an important influence on promoting the development of universities in our country. But after the founding of New China, this system was interrupted for a long time. In recent years, with the reform and deepening development of higher education system in our country, more and more attention has been paid to the management of universities by professors, and many universities have begun to try new ones. Try to build the governance model and structure in accordance with the situation of colleges and universities in China. But so far, there are still serious problems and crises in the internal governance of Chinese universities. The main realization is that there are some misunderstandings on the idea of managing the university by professors; the cultural tendency of the subject level in the management system of colleges and universities; and the lack of the legal system of the management of the schools by professors. These problems have seriously restricted the further improvement of the level of higher education in our country. In view of this, the main direction of the internal reform of Chinese universities should be to draw lessons from the successful experience of professors in European and American universities so as to restore the position and authority of professors and academic forces in school management.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：杭州師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：G647

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張艷,梁戈;西方大學(xué)教授權(quán)力的合理性分析及比較[J];比較教育研究;2000年06期

2 眭依凡;教授“治�！�:大學(xué)校長(zhǎng)民主管理學(xué)校的理念與意義[J];比較教育研究;2002年02期

3 孫進(jìn);德國(guó)大學(xué)改革問(wèn)題的組織理論解析[J];北京大學(xué)教育評(píng)論;2005年02期

4 左玉河;;堅(jiān)守與維護(hù)：中國(guó)現(xiàn)代大學(xué)之“教授治校”原則[J];北京大學(xué)教育評(píng)論;2008年02期

5 陳樹(shù)生;;論校長(zhǎng)負(fù)責(zé)制環(huán)境中的教授參與治校機(jī)制[J];成都中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(教育科學(xué)版);2004年01期

6 張成林;曾曉萱;;MIT工程教育思想初探[J];高等工程教育研究;1988年01期

7 熊慶年;代林利;;大學(xué)治理結(jié)構(gòu)的歷史演進(jìn)與文化變異[J];高教探索;2006年01期

8 袁耀梅;;“教授治�！钡臍v史考查[J];高校后勤研究;2009年03期

9 張金福;論梅貽琦“教授治�！崩砟畹奈幕馓N(yùn)[J];華東師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(教育科學(xué)版);2002年04期

10 韓驊;;論“教授治�！盵J];高等教育研究;1995年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 苗素蓮;中國(guó)大學(xué)組織特性歷史演變研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2004年

2 彭陽(yáng)紅;論“教授治�！盵D];華中科技大學(xué);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前9條

1 王麗萍;治理下的高教管理體制改革研究[D];中南大學(xué);2004年

2 李濤;“教授治�！痹谖覈�(guó)20世紀(jì)上半葉引進(jìn)的回顧與反思[D];山西大學(xué);2005年

3 劉姣花;現(xiàn)代大學(xué)制度下二元權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)的優(yōu)化研究[D];華中農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué);2005年

4 徐峰;西方大學(xué)教授治校研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2006年

5 耿秀梅;我國(guó)大學(xué)教師的學(xué)術(shù)責(zé)任研究[D];河北師范大學(xué);2006年

6 張國(guó)彬;我國(guó)大學(xué)行政權(quán)力與學(xué)術(shù)權(quán)力關(guān)系的制度分析[D];首都師范大學(xué);2008年

7 于玉;論教授治校的可行性[D];西南大學(xué);2009年

8 葛春霞;美國(guó)大學(xué)教授治校的理論與實(shí)踐研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2009年

9 姜晶;中國(guó)大學(xué)教授治校問(wèn)題研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2173325